法華義疏 7

English (machine translation) 7

Language: English

The meaning of belief and understanding is distinguished through six sections: first, the section on the purpose of its appearance; second, the section on explaining the name; third, the section on revealing the essential nature; fourth, the section on the characteristics of belief and understanding; fifth, the section on the stages of belief and understanding; sixth, the section on identities and differences.

7.4

Regarding the section on the purpose of its appearance: expounding the Dharma for people of middling faculties has four sections in all; the first, the direct exposition, is already completed, and this is the second, the appreciation and understanding by those of middling faculties.

7.5

Question:

7.6

The "Expedient Means Chapter" says, "If one has truly attained arhatship, it is impossible that one would not believe this Dharma." If so, upon hearing the initial Dharma exposition, they should have directly understood; why did they have to wait for the parable before they believed and understood?

7.7

Answer:

7.8

When the sūtra says they must believe, it is spoken from beginning to end. It does not say that upon the initial Dharma exposition they could immediately believe and understand. Moreover, when people of middling faculties initially heard the Dharma exposition, their humble minds had already believed, but because they had not yet understood, it became distinct only upon reaching the parable. Therefore, the present text does not contradict the "Expedient Means Chapter".

7.9

Second, regarding the section on explaining the name: the designation "belief and understanding" has both separate and combined meanings. As for the separate meanings, there are three in total: First, the removal of doubt is called "belief", and the shattering of clinging is called "understanding". Doubt is a term for hesitation; belief is the intention of certainty. The śrāvakas hesitated between the provisional and the real, wavering between the one and the three; when this doubt ceased, it was called "belief"—that is, believing that the three are provisional and believing that the one is real. The shattering of clinging is called "understanding": understanding has the sense of awakening; clinging is the term for delusion and attachment. Once they clung to the three as real existence, they were fixated on the one as real non-existence; when this clinging was removed, it was therefore called "understanding". Understanding means understanding that the three do not exist and awakening to the fact that the one exists. This explanation comes from the Zhu Fahua jing (Commentary on the Lotus Sūtra), which accordingly says: "Not doubting what is illustrated by the parable is called 'belief'; repenting of one's fixations is called 'understanding'." Second, belief arises from non-belief, and understanding is generated from non-understanding. Non-belief means not believing in the provisionality of the three and the reality of the one; when this mind was altered, belief arose. Belief means believing that the three are provisional and believing that the one is real. Although they believed that the three are provisional, they did not yet understand why they are provisional; although they believed that the one is real, they had not yet awakened to why it is real. Now they have awakened to why they are provisional and understood why it is real, so it is called "understanding". Thus belief is at the beginning, and understanding is at the end. Therefore the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: "Belief is that which enables entry; wisdom is that which enables crossing over," which is its verification. However, initial belief is not devoid of understanding, but because the understanding is shallow it is called belief; subsequent understanding is not devoid of the earlier belief, but because the belief is deep it is called understanding. Third, belief breaks false views, and understanding breaks ignorance. Therefore the Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: "Having belief without wisdom increases ignorance; having wisdom without belief increases false views." Now, having belief breaks false views, and having understanding breaks ignorance; thus the two factors assist each other. But this meaning is difficult to explain clearly, so it is now further explained with four propositions: 1. Believing without understanding: although with a humble mind one accepts with belief, one cannot yet understand; this refers to people of dull faculties with right views. 2. Understanding without believing: this refers to people of sharp faculties with false views. 3. Both believing and understanding: this refers to people of sharp faculties with right views, namely the four great śrāvakas. 4. Neither believing nor understanding: this refers to people of dull faculties with false views.

7.10

Next, explaining belief and understanding combined, there are briefly two meanings: first, contrasting with what is above; second, comparing with what is below. Contrasting with what is above: understanding is of two kinds: first, seeing-understanding; second, belief-understanding. Relying little on the master's teachings and seeing much of the principle through one's own sentiment is like the bodhisattvas; hence the "Parable Chapter" says: "If there are bodhisattvas who in this assembly can single-mindedly listen to the real Dharma of the Buddhas," this is called seeing-understanding. Relying much on the master's teachings and seeing little of the principle through one's own sentiment, as the previous text says: "The remaining śrāvakas, because of believing the Buddha's words, are able to enter this sūtra; it is not the domain of their own wisdom," is belief-understanding. Now, in contrast to the seeing-understanding of the bodhisattvas, the śrāvakas are designated as "belief-understanding". Second, comparing with what is below: belief has the meaning of certainty. Although their understanding is attained through the Buddha, their understanding mind is firm and clear, recognizing that the principle must be so, unlike the vague and loose understanding of ordinary people; hence it is called "belief and understanding".

7.11

Third, regarding the section on revealing the essential nature: according to the Abhidharma, belief and understanding have two separate natures: belief is the mental factor of faith among the wholesome universal mental factors, and understanding is the mental factor of wisdom among the universal mental factors. According to the Tattvasiddhi Śāstra, both belief and understanding have the mind as their essential nature; however, upon the mind there are the functions of belief and understanding, and so they are conceptually explained as two. Now it is explained that if one sees the mind and the mental factors as having different essential natures or as having a single essential nature, these are all attached views of oneness and difference, not the essential nature of belief and understanding; the later section will fully explain this.

7.12

Fourth, regarding the section on the characteristics of belief and understanding: traditionally it was said that the meaning of belief and understanding mostly does not exceed four propositions, namely provisional, real, existence, and non-existence. They took the three vehicles as provisional and the One Vehicle as real, claiming that the principle is exclusively one and that there are no three vehicles. We now explain that this is merely a preliminary, clinging statement; it is not yet the wondrous awakening of a humble mind. If one definitely clings to the One Vehicle as real and the three vehicles as provisional, abandoning the three and seizing the one, this is still an acquisitive mind of taking and discarding. The Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: "Those with acquisition are called the two vehicles." Still not having appreciated and understood this, how can it be called belief and understanding? Moreover, if there is acquisition, then there is no path and no fruit; how then could the text below state, "We have now attained the path and attained the fruit"? Furthermore, if one says the three are definitively non-existent and holds the one to be really existent, these are still the two views of existence and non-existence. As the "Expedient Means Chapter" says: "Whether existing or non-existing, and so on, fully completing the sixty-two [views]." Once one possesses all views, there are craving and views; craving and views are afflictions; due to afflictions there is karma; due to karma one suffers pain. Such a person is like someone who drinks amṛta and it turns back into poison; this is failing to eliminate the old disease while newly giving rise to further delusions, hence it is not the characteristic of belief and understanding. What is now called belief and understanding can be sought in the fundamental tenet of the sūtra. The "Expedient Means Chapter" says: "All dharmas from the very beginning are constantly and naturally of the characteristic of quietude and cessation." Where is the one, and where are the three? They are neither provisional nor real. But because inverted sentiments are heavy, one cannot ascend all at once; therefore through expedient means they are induced and guided to gradually open into awakening. Thus earlier the five precepts and ten wholesome deeds were expounded to halt the evils of the three destinies; next the sages of the three vehicles were expounded to cause the abandonment of ordinary existence in the three realms; and finally, wanting to put to rest the coarseness of the three vehicles, the One Vehicle was explained as wondrous. All such teachings are the antidotal siddhānta, driving out a peg with a peg, using a lighter inversion to remove a heavier inversion. The Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: "Just as a monk in charge of affairs raises his hand and calls out, 'Let the whole assembly be silent!' this is using sound to check sound, not seeking sound." Expounding the good to halt evil does not mean remaining attached to the good; so too, how could expounding the one to eliminate the three mean remaining attached to the one? If one can abandon both the three and the one, eliminating both the provisional and the real, with the mind having nothing to rely upon, only then is it called belief and understanding. Therefore the "Expedient Means Chapter" says: "With countless expedient means I guide sentient beings, causing them to be free from all attachments," which is its verification.

7.13

Fifth, regarding explaining the stages of belief and understanding: when śrāvakas turn from the small and enter the great, they first manage to enter the stage of the ten faiths of a bodhisattva; hence the previous text says: "You, Śāriputra, by the power of faith are able to enter this sūtra," which is its verification. Furthermore, Tripiṭaka Master Paramārtha said: "The text of the Treatise on the Seventeen Grounds also makes this determination." Moreover, the principle and numbers should naturally be so: when studying the Hīnayāna, one does not yet believe in the Mahāyāna; now that one breaks attachment to the small and believes in the great, one knows that one begins to study the ten faiths.

7.14

Question:

7.15

When śrāvakas turn from the small and enter the great to enter the stage of the ten faiths, do they enter the initial mind of the ten faiths, or the fulfillment of the ten faiths?

7.16

Answer:

7.17

They only enter the initial mind of the ten faiths. Therefore the Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: "A srotāpanna arrives after eighty thousand kalpas... up to a pratyekabuddha who arrives after ten thousand kalpas." What is referred to as "arriving" means reaching the initial mind of the ten abodes; therefore we know that upon turning from the small and entering the great, one has not yet fulfilled the ten faiths. Tripiṭaka Master Paramārtha said: "There are two kinds of icchantikas: first, ordinary people; second, the two vehicles." The icchantika of ordinary people believes in neither the three nor the one; the icchantika of the two vehicles believes in the three but does not believe in the one. Now hearing the Lotus Sūtra refute the three, they first manage to enter the bodhisattva stage of the ten faiths. As for the ten faiths, the five faculties of faith, vigor, mindfulness, concentration, and wisdom constitute five; the sixth is the mind of non-retrogression; the seventh is the mind of dedication; the eighth is the mind of morality; the ninth is the mind of protection; and the tenth is the mind of aspiration.

7.18

Question:

7.19

Turning from the small and entering the great up to the ten faiths, which faith is this?

7.20

Answer:

7.21

They merely attain the initial mind of faith. How is this known? As cited earlier, an arhat fulfills the ten faiths only after twenty thousand kalpas; therefore we know it is merely the initial mind.

7.22

Question:

7.23

What is the difference between the ten faiths of a direct-advancing bodhisattva and the ten faiths of one who turns from the small and enters the great?

7.24

Answer:

7.25

They are mutually superior and inferior. In the ten faiths of a direct-advancing bodhisattva, the application of expedient means is strong and the application of prajñā is weak: because bodhisattvas mostly cultivate manifold practices to deliver sentient beings, the application of expedient means is strong; and not wishing to concentrate single-mindedly on cultivating the contemplation of emptiness to eradicate afflictions, the contemplation of prajñā is weak. The two vehicles concentrate single-mindedly on cultivating the contemplation of emptiness to eradicate afflictions, so their contemplation of prajñā is strong. Now, turning from the small and entering the great, they only begin to learn active practices to deliver beings, so their application of expedient means is weak.

7.26

Question:

7.27

Since an arhat who turns from the small and enters the great is in the ten faiths, are they reborn outside the realms or inside the realms?

7.28

Answer:

7.29

They are reborn outside the realms. As the Commentary (Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa) and the Śrīmālādevī Sūtra both state, arhats undergo transformation-birth outside the three realms, whereas direct-advancing bodhisattvas of the ten faiths are reborn inside the realms.

7.30

Question:

7.31

If so, the direct-advancing ten faiths are inferior, and the turning-from-the-small ten faiths are superior; why was it said earlier that those who turn from the small are at the initial mind?

7.32

Answer:

7.33

It has already been explained above that they are mutually strong and weak. Those who turn from the small exclusively cultivate the contemplation of emptiness and eradicate afflictions, and therefore are reborn outside the realms; direct-advancing practitioners do not concentrate exclusively on contemplating emptiness to sever fetters, and therefore are reborn inside the realms. Yet when it comes to engaging in existence to transform people with deep and pure compassion, those who turn from the small cannot match them; hence the direct-advancing are superior.

7.34

Question:

7.35

At what bodhisattva stage are the practitioners of the two vehicles who sever fetters and take rebirth?

7.36

Answer:

7.37

According to the Fahua lun's commentary on the "Distinction of Merits Chapter", bodhisattvas before the bhūmis are reborn inside the realms, while those who have ascended to the bhūmis and above are reborn outside the realms. According to the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa, a bodhisattva of the seventh bhūmi attains the forbearance of non-arising of dharmas within the physical body, and upon casting off the physical body receives a dharma-nature-born body outside the three realms. According to Tripiṭaka Master Paramārtha's interpretation of the Mahāyānasaṃgraha, from the sixth mind of the ten practices onward they are reborn outside the three realms. The sūtras and treatises differ, and it is difficult to determine definitively.

7.38

Sixth, as for the section on similarities and differences, there are overall seven differences. First is the difference between brief and extensive: Śāriputra's expression of understanding was brief, whereas those of medium capacity stated their awakening extensively. Second is the difference between distant and near: Śāriputra recently recounted the present, while Kāśyapa distantly recounted the remote past. Moreover, Śāriputra's recounting of the present only ran from the Deer Park onward up to the Lotus Sūtra, whereas Kāśyapa began from the Avataṃsaka Sūtra onward and culminated in the teaching of the ekayāna. Third is the difference between general and specific: Śāriputra specifically recounted his own person, whereas Kāśyapa generally set forth the entire assembly. Fourth is the difference between absence and presence: previously there was no parabolic explanation, whereas now there is. Fifth is the difference between few and many: previously he only recounted the three teachings, whereas now they fully recount the five vehicles. Sixth is the difference in joy: Śāriputra grieved in the past and rejoiced in the present, whereas Kāśyapa did not harbor grief in the past, but now, having unexpectedly obtained a great treasure without ever having sought it in mind, gave rise to joy.

7.39

Question:

7.40

Why is it so?

7.41

Answer:

7.42

This is merely a mutual demonstration of difference. Furthermore, it shows that Śāriputra, having sharp capacity, was able to deduce that while the principle is the same, the teachings differed, and hence he grieved in the past and rejoiced in the present; whereas those of medium capacity merely clung to and upheld the Hīnayāna teaching, considering it the ultimate, and therefore did not harbor grief in the past.

7.43

Seventh is the difference regarding persons: there was only one person of superior capacity who assimilated understanding, whereas there are four persons of medium capacity who assimilate understanding, and those of inferior capacity who assimilate understanding are countless in number.

7.44

Question:

7.45

The Vibhāṣā states that all śrāvakas are divided into three grades: of superior capacity there is only one person, because Śāriputra alone practiced for sixty kalpas; of medium capacity there is also one person, namely Maudgalyāyana; and all remaining śrāvakas belong to inferior capacity. Why then are there four persons of medium capacity here?

7.46

Answer:

7.47

Maudgalyāyana was of medium capacity among the śrāvakas who awakened and entered the Mahāyāna, and was not necessarily superior to Kāśyapa; hence [the others also] enter the count of medium capacity.

7.48

The chapter is divided into two parts: first, the compiler of the sūtra recounts the signs of their attaining understanding; second, they speak and personally express their assimilation of understanding. Within the first, there are again four distinctions: first, identifying the persons who attained understanding; second, clarifying the Dharma that was heard; third, inner joy; fourth, outward rendering of respect. The first [pair] is a couplet of persons and Dharma; the latter is a couplet of joy and respect. Among the four persons, that Subhūti is clarified first may be because Subhūti was the first to rise from his seat at that time. Or it may be because Subhūti had the merit of transmitting the teachings, and therefore was listed first.

7.49

Question:

7.50

How do the four great śrāvakas of the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Sūtra differ from those here?

7.51

Answer:

7.52

That sūtra explains Śāriputra's wisdom, Maudgalyāyana's concentration, Subhūti's understanding of emptiness, and Kāśyapa's practice of existence, taking these four persons as the great śrāvakas. This sūtra explains that Śāriputra, having sharp capacity, stood out alone beyond the rest of the assembly and was not included among the four great śrāvakas; rather, it takes Subhūti's understanding of emptiness, Kātyāyana's comprehension of existence, Kāśyapa's dhūtas, and Maudgalyāyana's dhyāna-concentration [as the four].

7.53

Question:

7.54

The Dufo jingjie jing explains eight great śrāvakas. Who are they?

7.55

Answer:

7.56

I have not seen the sūtra explain this. In my view, the four great śrāvakas among the ten disciples constitute four persons. Furthermore, the Tripiṭaka Master said: 'Kātyāyana understood the Sūtra Piṭaka, Upāli understood the Vinaya Piṭaka, Pūrṇa understood the Abhidharma Piṭaka, and Ānanda held the three piṭakas altogether; combined, they make eight great persons.'

7.57

From 'having heard from the Buddha' onward is the second part, clarifying the Dharma that was heard, which is the condition for attaining understanding. There are two conditions for attaining understanding: first, taking the Dharma as the condition; second, taking a person as the condition, namely the conferment of prophecy on Śāriputra. Taking the Dharma as the condition generates joy in the present; taking a person as the condition brings joy from anticipating the attainment of prophecy. From 'giving rise to a rare mind' onward is the third, inner joy, which is precisely the assimilation of understanding. From 'immediately arose from their seats' onward is the fourth, clarifying the outward rendering of respect. Regarding 'baring the right shoulder': before rising, they were properly wearing their kāṣāyas; according to the Vinaya in foreign countries, one does not wear an armpit-covering garment or an asymmetrical upper garment, and wearing them incurs a duṣkṛta offense. Here, 'baring the right shoulder' means simply exposing the right shoulder, without any inner garment.

7.58

From 'and addressed the Buddha, saying' onward is the second, speaking and personally expressing their assimilation of understanding. As for the text, it has two parts: first, properly expressing their assimilation of understanding; next, praising the Buddha's kindness as profound and difficult to repay. Because their understanding was attained through the Buddha, they praise the Buddha's kindness; furthermore, truly because they assimilated understanding did they first recognize the Buddha's kindness, so they praise the depth of the Buddha's kindness to complete their assimilation of understanding. The first text again has two parts: first, prose; next, verses. The prose has three parts: namely, the Dharma, the parable, and the application. Grouping like with like, it is divided into two: first, the Dharma explanation briefly expresses their assimilation of understanding; next, from the parabolic explanation onward, it extensively expresses their assimilation of understanding. The former is brief and the latter extensive in order to explain the meaning. Within the first there are again two parts: first, recounting past delusion; second, expressing present awakening.

7.59

Recounting past delusion also has two parts: first, clarifying that because they clung to the Hīnayāna, they did not seek the Mahāyāna; second, clarifying that even upon hearing the Mahāyāna, they did not seek the Mahāyāna. The reason only these two are clarified is that they were fully deluded about both the Hīnayāna and Mahāyāna teachings. When the Buddha spoke the Hīnayāna, his original intention was to make them awaken to the Mahāyāna, just as raising a finger originally aims to point out the moon; yet now they chased after and clung to the Hīnayāna without seeking the Mahāyāna, holding to the finger and forgetting the moon—this was delusion regarding the Hīnayāna teaching. Second, when they previously heard the great Dharma in person, which was meant to make them abandon the Hīnayāna and awaken to the Mahāyāna, they ended up delighting in the Hīnayāna without yearning for the Mahāyāna—this again was delusion regarding the great Dharma. Prior to the Vulture Peak, there were only these two ailments, and therefore they are recounted in full. Regarding 'we stand at the head of the saṃgha': for four causes and conditions they did not seek unsurpassed bodhi: First, standing at the head of the saṃgha, they merely instructed others, and it was not a time for progressing on their own. Second, 'our years are already decayed and old': their will and resolve were declining and exhausted, incapable of advancing their own practice. Third, 'thinking that we had already attained nirvāṇa': thinking that what they attained was ultimate, they did not cultivate causes further. Fourth, 'being incapable of any responsibility': sinking into quiescent emptiness, they could not undergo practice further. Just as four rivers join and flow together into the mouth of the ocean, where none but a dragon of great strength can turn back on its own, so the three liberations flow together into the ocean of nirvāṇa, and the small strength of the śrāvaka cannot emerge on its own; hence it says 'incapable of any responsibility.' It is also like the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Sūtra saying, 'Just like rotten seeds that are incapable of producing sprouts.' Possessing these four meanings, they did not advance to seek bodhi.

7.60

Regarding 'The World-Honoured One in the past expounded the Dharma for a long time': this is the second part, clarifying that upon hearing the Mahāyāna, they did not seek the Mahāyāna. The former was delusion regarding the Hīnayāna teaching, and the latter delusion regarding the Mahāyāna, because the Buddha first expounded the Hīnayāna and later expounded the Mahāyāna. As for the text, it has three parts: first, clarifying their delight in the Hīnayāna and lack of joy in the Mahāyāna; next, explaining it; last, the conclusion. 'Expounded the Dharma for a long time' means expounding the Mahāyāna Dharma for a long time. 'Our bodies grew tired and weary': because their minds took no pleasure in the Mahāyāna, they could not forget their fatigue, which is why they were tired and weary. 'Only contemplating the three emptinesses': abhorring this retributive body, they wished to enter emptiness to forget it. From 'regarding the bodhisattva dharmas' onward: above clarified delighting in the Hīnayāna; here it is not yearning for the Mahāyāna. 'Roaming playfully in supernatural powers': for great beings to manifest transformations is not difficult, which is metaphorically compared to play. Furthermore, manifesting supernatural powers to cross beings over can be self-entertaining, hence it is called play. Also, because supernatural powers are not the real truth, they are called play. 'Purifying buddha lands and bringing sentient beings to maturation': giving rise to vows is purifying the lands, and initiating practices is bringing sentient beings to maturation. 'Our minds took no pleasure': the former clarified abiding in the Hīnayāna without seeking the Mahāyāna; now it clarifies that not only did they not seek it, but even hearing the great Dharma in person, they did not take fond pleasure in it for even a single thought-moment. From 'Why is this?' onward is the second, explaining why they did not enjoy the Mahāyāna. As for the text, it has two parts: first, clarifying their lack of joy in the Mahāyāna in the past. From 'And now we' onward clarifies their lack of joy in the Mahāyāna in the present. From 'regarding the Buddha's teaching and transforming of bodhisattvas' onward is the third, concluding their failure to seek the Mahāyāna.

7.61

From 'We now, before the Buddha' onward is the second part, clarifying their present clear awakening and recounting their joy upon attaining understanding. 'Hearing the conferment of prophecy on the śrāvakas' clarifies the condition for attaining understanding. Although they had heard both the Dharma and the parabolic explanations above, the meaning was not yet settled; only upon hearing the conferment of prophecy on the śrāvakas did they verify the ekayāna. Furthermore, because both the Dharma and the parabolic explanations were to enable śrāvakas to become buddhas, the prophecy conferred on the two vehicles is the central doctrine of this sūtra, and therefore it is specifically raised. The Dazhidulun states, 'The Lotus Sūtra confers prophecies on the two vehicles to become buddhas,' which is the proof of this. 'Our hearts are greatly rejoiced' properly clarifies their joy. 'Not expecting that now we would suddenly hear it' explains the meaning of their joy, distinguishing it from Śāriputra's. Śāriputra rejoiced now because he grieved in the past; Kāśyapa originally had no mind to seek it, and having unexpectedly obtained the great jewel without ever intending it, he rejoiced. 'Deeply congratulating ourselves': previously clarified joy; now they congratulate themselves. 'Gaining great and good benefit' refers to the Buddha Path.

7.62

From 'World-Honoured One! We now would take pleasure in speaking a parable to clarify this meaning' onward is the second part, extensively recounting their assimilation of understanding. It is again divided into three: first, requesting to take pleasure in speaking; second, properly speaking the parable; third, applying the parable. The preceding Dharma explanation briefly recounted the matters of Śākyamuni's lifetime teachings of both Hīnayāna and Mahāyāna without exhausting them; now, by raising the parable to extensively set forth the immeasurable matters and the dharma-gates from beginning to end, they can reveal the sentiments of delusion and awakening and praise the Buddha's merits. 'To clarify this meaning': although the text of the parable is long, it merely clarifies the meaning of loss and gain. The first two sections are loss, and the latter section is gain; the parable is set up to clarify these two meanings. From 'Suppose there was a man' onward is the second part, opening the parable. Now, the meaning of the parable is explained through three sections: first, the section on the purpose; second, the section on fewer or more; third, the section on assimilating understanding.

7.63

Regarding the section on the purpose: according to the Fahua lun, the parable of the burning house refutes ordinary beings, while the parable of the impoverished son rebukes the grasping of persons of the two vehicles. The reason for first refuting ordinary beings and next having to rebuke the two vehicles is to demonstrate the gradual stages of the sequential dharma-gates for curing sickness. The śrāvakas thought that the nirvāṇa-dharma attained by the three vehicles is identical, that the three vehicles are all correct, and that the three classes of adepts are also without difference. Therefore, it is now clarified that the dharma attained by the two vehicles is like that thatched hut, whereas the Dharma attained by the Tathāgata is like the great mansion; the persons of the two vehicles are like the impoverished son, whereas the Tathāgata is like the great wealthy elder. For this reason, Kāśyapa himself spoke of the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna, fully clarifying their superiority and inferiority, in order to cause all who study the Hīnayāna to abandon the Hīnayāna and enter the Mahāyāna; hence this parable was spoken. Second, it is to cause all bodhisattvas to know that the Mahāyāna is noble and superior while the Hīnayāna is base and inferior, and to definitively abide in the Mahāyāna without retrogressing to grasp the Hīnayāna; hence this parable was spoken. Furthermore, it is to cause those who receive the Buddha's teaching to fully recognize the dharma-gates of Śākyamuni's lifetime transformation from beginning to end, knowing the teachings that are provisional and real, earlier and later, shallow and deep, exoteric and esoteric; hence this parable was spoken.

7.64

Second, the section determining the number of parables: Interpretations of this parable vary, but here it should be divided into ten: 1. the parable of originally being father and son; 2. the parable of losing each other midway; 3. the parable of the son gradually returning to his native land; 4. the parable of father and son seeing each other; 5. the parable of calling the son in vain; 6. the parable of sprinkling cold water on his face; 7. the parable of enticing him to return home; 8. the parable of entrusting the wealth and secretly transforming him; 9. the parable of tempering and training the narrow mind; 10. the parable of delegating the family estate. As for the parable of originally being father and son: Śākyamuni expounded the Mahāyāna Dharma to them in past lives, and was therefore called the father; having once received his great conversion, they are called sons. Thus the text below says: 'This is my son, born of me.' As for the parable of losing each other midway: the mind of contemplation was weak and afflictions were strong; dragged by delusion, they drifted in saṃsāra—the son losing the father. The Tathāgata sought their maturation of Mahāyāna wholesome roots and could not find it—this is called the father losing the son. As for the parable of the son gradually returning to his native land: it is the nature of phenomena that when experiencing manifold sufferings one aspires to seek nirvāṇa; thus, when suffering reaches its peak, there is a turning back to the source. Therefore, gradually accumulating wholesome roots, one progressively inclines toward the ultimate Mahāyāna principle; hence it is named the parable of the son gradually returning to his native land. As for the parable of father and son seeing each other: within a single lifetime, the Mahāyāna wholesome roots mature and there is awakening into the great meaning—this is called the son seeing the father; seeing that within a single lifetime his Mahāyāna wholesome roots have matured is called the father seeing the son. As for the parable of calling the son in vain: when [the Buddha] first attained the Way, the capacity for the Great [Vehicle] was not yet ripe, and he was incapable of receiving the great teaching; hence it is named calling the son in vain. As for the parable of sprinkling cold water on his face: when [the Buddha] first attained the Way, the Mahāyāna wholesome roots were not yet ripe, and only the wholesome roots of humans and gods were mature; therefore, he expounded the teachings of humans and gods for him, just like sprinkling cold water on the face makes one immediately regain consciousness; hence it is named the parable of sprinkling cold water on his face. As for the parable of enticing him to return home: previously, under the Bodhi tree, he expounded the teachings of humans and gods, which were the worldly vehicles of birth and death, likened to turning toward another's home; next, proceeding to the Deer Park, he expounded the two vehicles, which are world-transcending dharmas, leading them from the mundane to return to the supramundane. The supramundane dharma is the elder's home; hence it is named the parable of enticing him to return home. As for the parable of entrusting the wealth and secretly transforming him: the narrow aspiration gradually shifted and the great capacity was stirred from afar; therefore, he was commissioned to expound the great Dharma to secretly instruct the narrow mind; hence it is named the parable of entrusting the wealth and secretly transforming him. As for the parable of tempering and training the narrow mind: from the Prajñā[pāramitā] onward until before the Lotus [Sūtra], the various Vaipulya teachings disparaged the śrāvakas and praised the bodhisattvas, leading them to feel some disdain for their narrow minds and gradually rejoice in the Great Way; this is named the parable of tempering and training the narrow mind. As for the parable of delegating the family estate: the narrow attachment having been eradicated and the great capacity matured, he expounded the One Vehicle for them, causing them to inherit the Buddha's estate; hence it is named the parable of delegating the family estate.

7.65

Third, the section on expressing understanding in verse: these ten parables correspond to and express understanding of the six parables in the 'Parable Chapter'. The parable of originally being father and son expresses understanding of the elder and the thirty sons in the overall parable above. The parable of losing each other midway expresses understanding of [the passage in] the parable of seeing the fire above: 'Your sons previously entered this house out of play.' The parable of the son gradually returning to his native land also expresses understanding of [the passage in] the parable of seeing the fire: 'Hearing someone say, "Your sons previously entered this house out of play,"' which means that sentient beings have the capacity to petition the Buddha, and therefore the Buddha responds by entering birth and death. The capacity moving the Buddha corresponds to the son gradually returning to his native land. The Buddha responding by entering birth and death is like the father knowing the son ought to return, and thus halting halfway in a city. The parable of father and son seeing each other also expresses understanding of the parable of seeing the fire: sentient beings having the capacity to move the Buddha is like the son seeing the father; the Buddha responding by entering birth and death is like the father seeing the son. Here, three parables together express understanding of the parable of seeing the fire above, but they are compared only in broad outline and cannot correspond completely in every detail. The parable of calling the son in vain here expresses understanding of the parable of being unable to save the sons above. The parable of sprinkling cold water on his face expresses understanding of the words 'such various kinds' in the parable of the three carriages above. The text above says 'such various kinds of goat carriages, deer carriages, and ox carriages', which are the three vehicles. Mentioning 'various kinds' before the three carriages refers to expounding the human and divine vehicles before the three vehicles. This is an old interpretation in the commentaries; do not doubt it. The parable of enticing him to return home expresses understanding of the parable of successfully transforming the sons through the goat and deer carriages among the three carriages above; expressing understanding of these two carriages above, it therefore presents two messengers here. The two parables of entrusting the wealth and secretly transforming him and tempering and training the narrow mind express understanding of the great carriage among the three carriages above; because the great carriage among the three carriages explicitly indicates the Mahāyāna Dharma, which refers to the various Mahāyāna teachings prior to the Lotus [Sūtra], these two parables therefore express understanding of it. The parable of delegating the family estate expresses understanding of the parable of bestowing the great carriage equally above. As for why it does not express understanding of the sixth parable, that of [the father] not lying: once they attained understanding, they knew that the Buddha does not lie; hence they do not express understanding of the parable of not lying. However, former scriptural masters insisted that the later parables must correspond strictly to the earlier ones; this completely misses the purport of the sūtra. Why is this so? The Buddha and his disciples jointly revealed the esoteric teaching to tame and subdue sentient beings, and thus expounded the Dharma by shifting their approach; hence the Buddha spoke six parables before, and the disciples elucidated ten parables after. They correspond only in broad outline, while their stylistic frameworks differ. One should properly take the sequence of the latter ten parables as primary and their expressing understanding of the former six as secondary, just as the general import of the 'Parable Chapter' and the 'Expedient Means Chapter' is the same, yet their adaptations differ.

7.66

'Suppose there is a man' is the first, the parable of originally being father and son. This text explains father and son in four rounds: the first round explains three parables in terms of the son; next, it explains three parables in terms of the text on the father; next, the father explains two meanings in terms of the son; the next round explains two meanings in terms of the father. The first passage explaining three parables in terms of the son consists of: 1. the parable of the time of originally being a son; 2. the parable of losing the father midway; 3. the parable of the son gradually returning to his native land. Later, three meanings are also explained in terms of the father. 'Suppose there is a man': this refers to the śrāvakas of the three capacities in this assembly. 'A man' parallels the meaning of the son. In the past, when the Buddha was a bodhisattva, he spoke according to his practice, and sentient beings practiced according to his speech; sharing the same practice, their relationship was like that of father and son. 'Young and childish': this clarifies the meaning of being small. 'Son' applies to both great and small, so 'young and childish' is specifically added. Having just begun to receive transformation, he is 'young'; contemplation and understanding being weak, he is called 'childish'. 'Abandoning his father and running away' is the second, the parable of losing each other midway. Having just begun to receive transformation, his contemplation and understanding were weak and could not hold firm; consequently, dragged by delusion, he lost his father. The Buddha can expound the teaching to manifest the principle, taking the Buddha as father; being confused about the teaching and deluded about the principle, being unable to move the Buddha, is called losing the father. But losing the father is twofold: 1. the fundamental loss. As the Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: 'Depending on where it flows, the six tastes differ; because of losing the Buddha-nature, the six destinies are distinguished.' Because of this loss, the Buddhas and bodhisattvas expounded the correct Mahāyāna teaching, causing them to reverse the loss and attain gain; but sentient beings' delusion was strong and contemplation was weak, so they again became confused about the teaching and deluded about the principle—this is losing again within loss. The former is a spontaneous loss; the latter is a loss while studying the teaching.

7.67

Question:

7.68

The latter loss has a beginning; when did the former loss occur?

7.69

Answer:

7.70

Whether the former loss has a beginning or is beginningless, both positions have faults. Therefore, the *Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa* says: 'Deep water and a fire pit can both harm people; having a beginning and being beginningless both harm correct contemplation.' The *Avataṃsaka Sūtra* says: 'Whether there is a beginning or it is beginningless is an indeterminate question; the Buddha does not answer it.' Furthermore, a sūtra says: 'A monk asked the Buddha whether the twelve links of dependent origination are made by oneself or made by another. Self-arising of ignorance means having a beginning, which is called made by oneself; arising further from another means being beginningless, which is called made by another. The Buddha rebuked him with various reasons: "Just as when a man is struck by a poisoned arrow, he only needs to ask a physician to pull it out, and should not seek the reason for the poisoned arrow."' Such a sentence is where scholars fall into confusion, so it is briefly stated here.

7.71

'Running away': being confused about the teaching and deluded about the principle is a hidden matter, yet sentient beings do not know and are not aware of it; hence it is called 'running'; turning away from the principle toward delusion is why it is called 'away'. 'Dwelling in another country for a long time': taking the Mahāyāna principle as one's own country, turning away from the principle and giving rise to delusion—delusion is the other country. Opposing the principle for an extended period is 'a long time'; clinging to delusion without abandoning it is 'dwelling'. 'Ten, twenty, or up to fifty years' explains the meaning of 'dwelling for a long time' above. Ten refers to the realm of gods; twenty refers to the realm of humans; fifty refers to the remaining three realms. At first, losing contemplation and giving rise to delusion was still light, so one was born in heaven; the force of delusion gradually grew heavier, so one was born as a human; the force of delusion grew even heavier, so one finally reached the three miserable destinies. Saying 'or' is an expression of uncertainty; one does not necessarily experience all of them, or one may traverse them all. Furthermore, saying 'or' is like the 'more than fifty years' below: since the remaining years are compared to asuras, here it may also follow that analogy. 'As he grew older' means that because he had been away from the great conversion for a long time, he is said to have 'grown older'. 'And furthermore fell into dire poverty': turning away from the conversion for an increasingly long time, new wholesome [roots] did not arise, which is 'poverty'; old wholesome [roots] were gradually exhausted, which is 'dire'; the designation 'poor son' is manifested in this sentence.

7.72

'Galloping in all four directions seeking food and clothing' is the third, the parable of the son gradually returning to his native land. Food and clothing are the pleasures of humans and gods. The four directions are the four forms of birth. Furthermore, the four directions are the other four realms, excluding hell and animals. Seeking everywhere is 'galloping'.

7.73

Question:

7.74

Sentient beings have already turned away from the principle and given rise to delusion, experiencing all kinds of suffering; by what means do wholesome roots arise?

7.75

Wholesome roots arise due to three reasons: First, it is the nature of phenomena that when experiencing manifold sufferings one aspires to seek nirvāṇa; therefore, when suffering reaches its peak, one seeks release. Second, sentient beings have once received the great conversion, and the seeds of wholesome roots cannot decay and perish. Third, Buddhas and bodhisattvas have three kinds of conversion: 1. the initial conversion, which was expounding the Mahāyāna for them in the past; 2. the pursuing conversion: when sentient beings turn away from the conversion, give rise to delusion, and drift in birth and death, Buddhas and bodhisattvas follow them into birth and death to transform and liberate them; 3. the ultimate conversion: bringing them to attain Buddhahood before finally letting go. Here, it is the pursuing conversion among the three conversions; therefore, they are able to generate wholesome roots.

7.76

'Gradually roaming about, he happened to head toward his native land': the native land is the Mahāyāna principle. The *Lotus Samādhi Sūtra* says: 'Returning to the source and exhausting desires, one makes a person return to his old village; the old village is named the unconditioned, and because of the unconditioned, it is called the pure chamber.' The Buddha answered a brāhmaṇa: 'In Prajñā Commandery, Original Limit County, Transcendent City, Absolute Ward, I dwell beneath the Sarvajña tree.' Turning away from evil toward good—since wholesome principle cannot be cultivated suddenly, it is 'gradually'; at this time, there is only human and divine wholesomeness, and looking toward the great conversion it is difficult to reach, which is also 'gradually'. Human and divine wholesomeness is not original wholesomeness; losing one's residence is 'roaming about'. Although human and divine wholesomeness is not original wholesomeness, the power of wholesomeness covertly aids the great capacity; hence it says 'happened to head toward'. The *Treatise* (*Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa*) says: 'Wholesomeness with acquisition is the primary gateway to non-acquisition'—this is precisely the case. The former was the beginning of abandoning the father, which should be called 'turning away'; this is the beginning of returning to the origin, so it says 'heading toward'.

7.77

Question:

7.78

If gradually roaming about still refers to human and divine wholesomeness, and human and divine wholesomeness still falls under the fifty-odd years, meaning he still dwells in another country, why is it called roaming about and happening to head toward his native land?

7.79

Answer:

7.80

Since the sūtra says 'gradually', it not only involves the wholesome roots of humans and gods, but also contains the meaning of generating the great aspiration and practicing the great practice. Speaking in terms of the initial stage, it is therefore called worldly wholesomeness.

7.81

"His father had previously sought his son without finding him": this explains three meanings with regard to the father: first, the time when he was a father; second, the time when he lost his son along the way; and third, the time when he stopped midway in a city. "His father" refers to the initial time when he was a father. This corresponds to the first above, the initial time when he was a son. "Had previously sought his son without finding him" corresponds to the second above, where the son lost his father; because the son lost the father, the father sought his son, but his wholesome roots of the Mahāyāna could not be brought to fruition. "Stopped midway in a city" is the third, corresponding to the son's gradual return to his homeland above. In terms of the parable, the natural bond between father and son brings about sympathetic resonance and spiritual interaction: once the son gradually returned to his native land, the father stopped midway in a city to await his son. In terms of the principle, it explains that the conditions for the path of the three faculties of śrāvakas were ripe for maturation; the Tathāgata, abiding on the ground of the dharmakāya, illuminated their capacities and conditions, and thus manifested a responsive body to become a Buddha. "Stopped midway" is spoken in terms of the bodies. This text possesses three bodies from beginning to end: the earlier statement that he sought his son without finding him is the dharmakāya, referring to the former time; the present is the Rocana body, which converted the bodhisattvas upon first achieving the Path and had not yet converted the two vehicles, called the time of stopping midway; and later, taking off his precious royal ornaments and putting on worn, soiled clothes to become Śākyamuni Buddha converting those of the two vehicles, refers to the latter time. It is like a person setting out toward a goal, who, having not yet reached his destination, halts and rests along the way. In terms of the parable of the śrāvakas' comprehension: the Tathāgata appeared in the world to convert his sons, and since the capacity for the Great [Vehicle] was already mature, he only converted the bodhisattvas and had not yet reached the point of converting the two vehicles; hence it says "stopped midway." It can also be understood as [standing] between the two pillars of past conversion and present conversion, hence it says "stopped midway." Manifesting a responsive body to reside in one region and act as a Buddha is why it says "one city." Moreover, manifesting a responsive body to reveal the one path is why it is called "one," and guarding against the false and wrong is why it is called a "city." "His family was exceedingly wealthy": in terms of the traces, formerly at the time of bodhisattvas they were together as father and son, yet the son turned his back on the father and wandered through birth and death in poverty and hardship, while the father, having lost his son, completed his practices, became a Buddha, and was fully endowed with all virtues—like being exceedingly wealthy. The general purport of this text praises the father's immense wealth in contrast to the son's poverty, such that nothing was lacking. As for the text, it has three parts: first, praising the master of conversion; second, explaining the assembly of disciples; and third, discerning the pedagogical teachings. These are the preacher of the true Dharma and the listeners, which briefly outline the three aspects of the assembly of the Avataṃsaka [Sūtra] at the time of first achieving the Path. If one takes the "stopped midway in a city" above to outline the site of conversion, it is the bodhimaṇḍa of tranquility and extinction in the realm of Magadha. "Exceedingly wealthy" refers to the manifold virtues of the Buddha-ground. The ten powers and the fearlessnesses are precious in essence, identical in meaning to the seven treasures; among the manifold virtues, that which nourishes the life of wisdom is like a granary, and that which stabilizes the dharmakāya is like a storehouse. Furthermore, the treasure of the Dharma cannot be spied upon or stolen, which is also like granaries and storehouses; the meaning of perfection is like "full," and the meaning of issuing forth for application is like "overflowing." "Having many servants": the second part explains the assembly of disciples; upon first achieving the Path, those converted were not of one kind, hence it says "having many." External commoners are like servants; internal commoners are like clerks and people; and those on the stages and above who can assist the Buddha in propagating the teaching are like ministers and aides. At this time there were no śrāvakas yet, so one must not cite the two vehicles to match this. From "elephants, horses, carriages, and mounts" onward: the third part explains the pedagogical teachings. Elephants and horses can bear heavy burdens and travel far; the pedagogical teachings can transport commoners and elevate them to the noble; these are the teachings of the five vehicles, just as the five vehicles are fully explained in the "Nature Arising Chapter" of the Avataṃsaka Sūtra. "Incalculable" refers to the eighty thousand treasuries of Dharma and the ineffable doors to the Dharma. "Inward and outward interest and profits": the conversion going forth from the Buddha is "outward"; the merit of conversion returning to the Buddha is "inward"; instruction is the capital's interest; and dedication of merit (pariṇāmanā) is the great profit. "Extending even to other countries" means that the conversion spreads throughout the ten directions. "Traveling merchants and resident peddlers were also very numerous": common people have four occupations, namely farming, traveling commerce, crafts, and resident peddling. Farming is the fields; traveling commerce is deliberating the prices of goods, meaning carrying goods on the road; crafts are artisans; and resident peddling is sitting and trading. This character [gu] should have 'shell' (bei) below 'west' (xi); the character gu (估) in the present sūtra text is merely the gu meaning to appraise taxes. As for "merchants" (jiakè, pronounced jiǎ): the above refers to the one who moves goods, and the present merchant (jiakè) is the one who purchases goods. Receiving the Path in this land and transmitting the conversion to other lands is called traveling commerce. Receiving conversion in this land and preaching the Dharma right in this land is called resident peddling. Comprehensively receiving the conversion of the previous two persons is like the merchant. Since these matters existed at the time the Path was achieved, they are borrowed as a parable.

First 81 of 269 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

法華義疏 — Classical Chinese